IN RE: MARIAH B. (2019)

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, New York County (Ta–Tanisha D. James, J.), entered on or about June 21, 2018, which found that respondent neglected and abused the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record supports Family Court's determination that, at the relevant times, respondent was a person legally responsible for the children, because he had resided in the home with them for two years, cared for them and assumed other household and parental duties (see Matter of Yolanda D., 88 N.Y.2d 790, 651 N.Y.S.2d 1, 673 N.E.2d 1228 [1996]; Matter of Christopher W., 299 A.D.2d 268, 751 N.Y.S.2d 2 [1st Dept. 2002]).  His contention that he had no relationship with the children was rebutted not only by the mother's testimony, which the court found credible, but by respondent's testimony that he was the children's guardian and godfather.

The determination that respondent abused and neglected the children is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act §§ 1046[b][i]; 1012[e][iii][A]; Matter of Jayden C. (Luisanny A.), 126 A.D.3d 433, 2 N.Y.S.3d 349 [1st Dept. 2015]).  Family Court was in the best position to observe the witnesses and assess their demeanor, and there is no basis to disturb its credibility determinations (see Matter of Ricardo M.J. [Kiomara A.], 143 A.D.3d 503, 38 N.Y.S.3d 196 [1st Dept. 2016]).  The evidence supports the finding that respondent neglected the children by committing acts of domestic violence against the mother in their presence, including choking her and threatening to kill her and the children, thereby placing the children's emotional well-being at imminent risk of harm (see Matter of Cristalyn G. [Elvis S.], 158 A.D.3d 563, 71 N.Y.S.3d 464 [1st Dept. 2018]; Matter of Nia J. [Janet Jordan P.], 107 A.D.3d 566, 567, 968 N.Y.S.2d 446 [1st Dept. 2013]).  The finding of abuse is supported by evidence that respondent committed acts constituting forcible touching in order to abuse and degrade the children (see Family Ct Act § 1012[e][iii]; Penal Law § 130.52[1]).  Contrary to respondent's argument, the court properly found that the child Mariah's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by testimony of a caseworker and her mother showing that she consistently reported the abuse (see Matter of Nicole V., 71 N.Y.2d 112, 118–119, 524 N.Y.S.2d 19, 518 N.E.2d 914 [1987]).

We have considered respondent's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.